skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I am Sam. And I wanna say 2024 is definitely a challenging year to me as I was laid off and a lot of changes in this year. My fav memory from Xmas would be the year of 2019, celebrating with my bff in winter wonderland, drinking, laughing, and we were really happy since we were still students with no worries at all. Wish time could go back
Show HN: Explore how nations talk about each other in UN speeches
How it works: Select a country on the globe to explore diplomatic relationships and see who's saying what about whom in the 2024 UN General Assembly Speeches.

How it's made: The project relies heavily on GenAI for several tasks:

- Reading speech documents in multiple languages

- Identifying both direct and indirect mentions of other countries

- Extracting and translating relevant quotations that demonstrate positive or negative sentiment

- Mapping mentions to correct ISO country codes

- Visualization is rendered using d3.js

This is still a work in progress with room for expansion. While currently focused on 2024 speeches, future plans include:

- Analyzing mentions across different years to reveal evolving diplomatic patterns

- Mapping speeches to UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to show which nations prioritize specific global challenges

Looking forward to your feedback on this initial version!
The few golden years when the kids were little, we’d all sit around the TV and play console games and when a hard bit came along, like a puzzle or a jump or a big boss with loads of guns, I’d be handed the controls to do the difficult bits. I got to be the family hero. We had great fun. A few years later, they all had way faster reaction times, and their own PC’s and games, and played them in their rooms. But for a few glorious Christmas’ we all came together and it was great. I miss those times, but on the other hand I helped them build their own PC systems, and set them off on the own paths. I helped them grow.
You can't represent 26 possibilities with a single hex digit. So it'll require 2 hex digits.

If you're going to require 2 digits, then that can be done with 2 decimal digits as well. So there's no need for hex, and no need for ascii tables.

However, if you need more than just the 26 letters, e.g. if you also need numbers and/or punctuation, then ascii might be useful, and hex might be useful to encode ascii into 2 digits.
> with a touch of AI

It's fascinating even to myself how fast I closed the tab. The annoyance and oversaturation with "ai" is on a level I didn't think was possible
:( I was just making a light hearted joke, I lost so much karma.
Agreed. Parser generators are a magic black box. Parsing is not too difficult, there is some actual computer science in some spots, but I think parsing should be a core complacency of a programming language to unlock full potential.
Visualizing SQL Plan Execution Time with FlameGraphs (2018)
Plus, [de]serialization often needs to be done under GIL (although under non-shared GIL per process, it interferes with any other async thing that may be done in each process).

It also screws up C extensions that don't support fork and does not solve the problem of increasing TLS handshake/fanout in outbound requests by the number of cores.

The whole thing sucks in production.
Nobody even knows about Dark City which came out the same year. Because the freaking Matrix came out too. That's just how many good films there were that year. If Dark City came out today it would be lauded as most original thing in a decade.
“Source available” is within the common usage of the term “closed source” which is simply the negation of “open source”.
I have posted about this before on HN. I push back against this sentiment. I had a post-doc roommate who was a native German speaker, who regularly used ChatGPT to improve his English grammar and phrasing while writing papers. He told me that ChatGPT was an excellent tutor to improve his English. A few times, he showed me the improvements. I agreed: It was pretty good.
I don't think using AI-generated images is bad. I also don't think using an LLM to help write an article is necessarily bad, either. They're both just tools.

You're equating using these tools with low-effort. And that's often true. But not always.

In our own blog/newsletter (about data and AI engineering), we spend a ton of effort doing a lot of the development work and the research work that goes into posts. Often the post is summarizing an open-source project we've released, sometimes it's summarizing research we've done, etc.

But we're not skilled artists. Nor are we skilled copywriters. And many of us don't speak English as a first language, either. So we use AI to generate images, and we use LLMs to help sharpen the writing on the blog post.

I don't think that makes our work low effort.
> In this case the accused was awarded damages, but that's not usually how this plays out.

The false imprisonment & settlement had to do with the clerical error that had him report back to jail after being cleared of charges. (an ongoing problem in its own right)

It is a completely separate issue from being locked up while charges were pending.
From what I have seen and experienced, we don’t need AGI, we just need good salesmen to sell high level management into accepting subpar results to cause mass layoff in the short term in name or cutting costs. Eventually, when the bill comes due, most of these management had been promoted/hired to some far away places where the consequences will only go further downward.
It is, with extra projection steps.

I believe it is called the "clickbait projection" in mathematics.

But yea, it is an interesting video and topic.
Which will be great until Google locks you out of Google.

Have a backup.
> As the article mentions, in the real world score voting would just be approval voting where you put a max score on some choices and 0 on others.

utterly false.

https://www.rangevoting.org/HonStrat
https://www.rangevoting.org/Honesty
https://www.rangevoting.org/RVstrat6

> And in approval voting you need to think about how others will vote and pick your cutoff point based on who you think has a chance

1. this is true of _every_ deterministic voting method. it's mathematically proven.

2. even approval voting is extremely accurate. see voter satisfaction efficiency calculations from harvard stats phd jameson quinn, who served with me on the board of the center for election science.
https://electionscience.github.io/vse-sim/

> RCV isn't perfect, but in all but the smallest elections there's really no practical strategic voting considerations. You just state your true preference order.

ludicrous. IRV is extremely vulnerable to strategic voting. my aunt who voted biden even tho she preferred warren (to stop trump) would do the same thing with ranking: rank biden 1st to prevent warren from losing to trump.

something similar happened in the first alaska house special election. palin was a spoiler. she caused the democrat mary peltola to win, even tho fellow republican nick begich was preferred to peltola (and to palin) by a large majority. in other words, palins supporters hurt themselves by honestly ranking palin 1st. they would have been strategically better off burying palin and ranking begich 1st.

https://rcvchangedalaska.com/

and the VSE metrics show that even 100% honest IRV performs worse than approval voting with all voters being strategic.

IRV is simply one of the worst voting methods in existence. not to mention being radically overcomplicated and opaque.

i'm sorry that you posted this before having even an inkling about how any of this works.
You don't need a whole new distro

$ apt search btrfs apt
Sorting... Done
Full Text Search... Done
apt-btrfs-snapshot/noble,noble 3.5.7 all
Automatically create snapshot on apt operations
there's nothing special about the condorcet criterion. it's mathematically proven that the most favored candidate can even be the condorcet _loser_. you just want the voting method with the highest voter satisfaction efficiency.

https://electionscience.github.io/vse-sim/
Glad I gave you a laugh, Merry Christmas! :)
Can I use this to play Duck Hunt?
The alignment problem you've solved was simply moved a few syllables.

How do you simply "not do that" and have a useful model to interact with?

Without reducing complexities to grammatical self terminating cliches, ponder: whatever you tell the model to do, including being honest - it could be lying, and lying dormant awaiting a critical mass of dependency.
Well, assuming I agree with your premise (I'm not sure I do), what percentage of all the companies in the world does Elon run?

I can also assure you that Julii exist at e.g. Tesla, which employees over 100000 people.

I don't want to start an Elon flame war, but from what I've read I would be sceptical of attributing his business success to technical acumen (which is not to deny that SpaceX builds very cool and impressive rockets, or that the businesses he own employ very smart and motivated people).
there is no good argument for IRV over score/approval. score and approval blow IRV out of the water on literally every single metric that matters. they're simpler, more accurate (with any ratio of strategic or honest voters), and more transparent and fair to minor party candidates.

https://clayshentrup.medium.com/later-no-harm-72c44e145510

it's not even close.
That’s fair. I agree that the ergonomics of the immutability matter , but I think that’s true of any aspect of a distro.

I think there’s been well done immutable systems and it’s something that can be achieved with a mainstream Linux distro.
It's interesting that the Russian version of the page uses the same blue color scheme Russians like to use for their consoles and equipment.

It's a neat and considerate detail if you ask me.
I personally don’t think anything is a great comparison.

It’s easy to say moderate premium over normal business grade SSD’s but that doesn’t mean any specific number is correct. I’d say the equivalent to a 130$ to 220$ SSD assuming a stand alone equivalent exited, but the actual number depending on info Apple isn’t sharing. And yes the range is both above and below the specific part suggested.
This is probably anecdotal evidence that the field is maturing rather rapidly.

Phd hires will continue ofcourse, its the volume and selection criteria that get adjusted. When a technical domain gets standardized its natural that the ratio of PhD's to Masters in a team lowers.

Mostly teams with a mandate to innovate (or at least signaling that intention) will have more of the former. A succesful Phd will always be a strong filter for certain types of abilities and dispositions. Just don't expect stampedes to last forever.
For those interested in some more testing of Qwen's censorship (including testing dataset, testing to compare english vs chinese responses, and a refusal-orthoganlized version of Qwen2): https://huggingface.co/blog/leonardlin/chinese-llm-censorshi...
it is a refinement type over the base number type, where the predicate constrains the number to lie in an interval

e.g. { x:Int8 | 1 ≤ x ≤ 12 }
I assure you, before the LLM race, those research shops (DM, FAIR) had many directors that didn't contribute to any product whatsoever.
What an absolutely perfect encapsulation of the times we live in.
TLDR: The charging infrastructure and charging capacity of vehicles is getting pretty good, but the logistics of the charging stations are awful and either have never been considered or were set down when charging was going to be a multiple hours long ordeal.

I've been vicariously experiencing the adjustment to EV life through a busy of mine who recently got an Ioniq 5 (2024, so not the tesla charging port). He does not have access to charging at home but does have the 2 years of free* charging at Electrify America (EA) stations. The charge infrastructure isn't that bad for him. While EV stations aren't nearly as prevalent as gas stations, he has multiple EA station options within his regular driving radius, and far more of he were to leave the EA network. Though it's LA, so it's probably the best in the US.

The biggest issue isn't finding a station or being confronted with nonfunctional chargers, it's the variability of charging duration among users and the pre-charging wait logistics. He gets 30 minutes of charging per day for free, but as long as he goes to a 350V charger, he'll hit 80% regardless of his initial charge state in under 30 minutes. Often, he's charging from around 40% to 80-something in under 15 minutes.

The trouble starts with the uniqueness of his car's charging rate. Plenty of EVs are not designed to charge at that rate, and it's a waste to have them slowly stopping electrons from the fire hose of the highest voltage chargers.

Combine mismatch that with the initial considerations of charge points/stations, when EVs took so long to charge that there was no point in considering a queue waiting to hook up because no one would ever wait for potentially hours and hours for the one car let along two or more car's ahead of them to charge and depart. So EV stations weren't designed like gas stations, they just get stuck in little pockets of empty space or on the periphery of a parking lot, probably marketed to the lot owners as a was to lie in potential shoppers who are going to have to spend the hour or more while they wait for their cars to charge doing something, so why not spending money at the mall or grocery store the chargers are in the lot of.

Unfortunately, while that's how the EV stations have developed, that's not really how the cars have. Sure, he might get stuck at a charging station in line behind a Nissan Leaf on 10% battery, but it seems easy more likely he'll be in line for 1 of 3 chargers with 4 or 5 other fairly fast charging EVs. So now he's in the supermarket parking lot awkwardly positioned with a bunch of other EV drivers vigilantly minding a virtual queue communicated through raised eyebrows, grimaces, and expressive stink-eye. There's often probably enough time waiting his turn to go on and do some shopping, but there's no way to do that and maintain the queue. Once he's hooked up, there's usually only enough time to run through like it was a gas station convenience store.
I wouldn't say that vision is clear. Not at all. It's constant thinking about faith, life questions, shaping values, etc. It's not easier path for sure.
Simple, lightweight, extensible, configuration management library for Go
I have ESPN+ and could not watch Monday's game, it was only on ESPN and I didn't have a cable subscription.
The Honey discount browser extension, owned by PayPal, allegedly scams not only its users, but the influencers who promote it.
Avid Hates You
Aren't there cases whose innocence has been discovered after they have been on death row?
High-performance electric motors do fail all the time. They overheat, position sensors are slipping, the converters IGBT's last max 6 years.

You are talking simple engines, I'm talking high-end engines.
They break more often than Python scripts, from reasons unrelated to bash versions, though.
Just to play devil's advocate, perhaps it has already been done (multiple people have won more than one ’1 in XX million chance' lotteries). And perhaps none of those who have the capability of something that specific/difficult (I.e. masters of the craft) want or care to have people know how real their abilities are.

I think it's all bullshit, but it doesn't hurt to play the other side sometimes.
Tried Guix?
she's really gorgeous.

i think my death will be me falling prey and being madly inlove with these nsa / ghcq / kgb / mossad / chinese spies.
> But you still need to work around collusions between candidates

No, you don’t, if it’s a multimember proportional system, like STV. There are some multimember systems your concern applies to, like the “vote for N, top N win” at-large system used for some US city councils, school district boards, and similar bodies: those are simply means to have a multimember body while avoiding either diffuse or geographically-concentrated minorities from being represented. (And the prospect of that particular kind of multimember arrangement being used to neutralize the effect of black voting rights, specifically, is why multimember districts are prohibited by federal law in Congressional apportionment, currently.)
I assume modulo?
"I don't know how many of you have ever met Dijkstra, but you probably know that arrogance in computer science is measured in nano-Dijkstras."
-Alan Kay
Devils advocate:

Given a hundred articles (in say, a social media feed) and a finite amount of time and cognitive capacity, how should one decide which articles to read?

If the presentation is AI generated images, and genuinely good content is otherwise “sharpened” with common AI fingerprint phrases in the excerpts and opening titles, what aspect would stop someone from equating it with other “bad” AI generated content and skipping it?
I made spectral image analysis at university. And there weren't good software Tools available
This is wild to me:

"Even though passengers have been forbidden from smoking on airplanes for 25 years, the rules about smoking in the cockpit are less straightforward, and international regulations appear to invest the captain with the authority to decide whether smoking will be allowed or not."
> I’m really against mixed-member proportional (and pretty much all form of proportional representation) since you end up with party hacks unaccountable to voters.

Candidate-centered proportional systems (e.g., single transferrable vote in moderately sized, 5-7 member, districts) do not have this problem of party-list/MMP systems, though they have somewhat less finely-grained partisan proportionality (limited by district rather than legislative body size.) OTOH, they are still potentially effectively more proportional because the general electorate preference for individual candidates captures more dimensions of both policy and non-policy preference than mere party preference captures.

It’s also possible to have the party lists being ranked by general electorate preference (especially in MMP, rather than full-body party list PR, because in MMP the list is only used for top-up seats which requires smaller, more manageable lists.)
This might get the causality backward. Most high trust societies were high trust before, not after, they became democracies.
Another thing that makes me close the page as soon as I can press CTRl-W is anime avatars, and if the blog is built like a back and forth discussion between two cartoon characters.
100% I did that at first and got greedy and impatient. Serves me right.
If you like a more practical version of the metrics feed, I created a Grafana dashboard once:

https://github.com/Radiergummi/iss-metrics
Show HN: Twice – Chrome Extension for Thinking Twice Before Social Media
Why does the article say "US" when it goes on to say that there is a surplus in 5 states? Does housing in Texas and Florida have some impact on Oregon or California or Maine?
I think liquid Haskell is a great example of refinement types?

https://ucsd-progsys.github.io/liquidhaskell/
> I can't think offhand of any mechanism by which it would escape in some preferred direction.

I think the sun’s heat would give it a slight preference to escape from the sunny side of earth.
> That overwhelming majority of people I know

You probably wont get to know a lot of people who don't go outside their house, so pretty biased sample there.
Why would you think that? Cell phone ping data is stored for a good amount of time and generated by a 3rd party that has no involvement in the case. Of course the phone can be given to someone else, but it has advantages over suspect generated data.
is it compatible with Python 3.13?
This is beautiful, I can create my own idea pipelines. Apply some rules for system based thinking, and have it generate carefully generated ideas.
> but I think that’s true of any aspect of a distro.

That's true, but these problems are worked on for a quite long time, and the core ethos of a Linux distribution is being able to be on both sides of the fence (i.e. as a user and as an administrator which can do anything).

For example, in macOS, you can't customize the core of the operating system since the eternity, and it's now sent you as an binary delta image for the OS, and you have no chance to built these layers or tweak them. This increases the ergonomics a ton, because you're not allowed to touch that part to begin with.

However, with Linux, you need to be able to change anything and everything on the immutable part, and this requires a new philosophy and set of tools. Adding esoteric targets like "I really need to be able to install two slightly different compilations of the same library at the exact same version" creates hard problems.

When these needs and the mentality of "This is old, let's bring it down with sledgehammers. They didn't know anything, they're old and wrinkly people" meets, we have reinventions of wheels and returning to the tried and working mechanisms (e.g.: Oh, dynamic linking is a neat idea. Maybe we should try that!)

Immutable systems are valuable, but we need less hype and more sane and down-to-earth development. I believe if someone can sit down and design something immutable with consideration to how a POSIX system works and what is reasonable and what's not, a good immutable system can be built. Yes it won't be able to do that one weird trick, but it'd work for 99% of the scenarios where an immutable system would make sense.
> So hypothetically, if we get to the point where play normally stops, why can't I put a stone into my opponent's territory? I am reducing his territory by 1 point. So he will presumably object and take my "dead" stone off, first restoring the balance and then penalising me one point by putting the newly captured stone in my territory. But can't I insist that he actually surrounds the stone before he takes it off? That would take four turns (I would pass each time) costing him 4 points to gain 1. There must be a rule to stop this, but is it easily formally expressed? Or is it a) Complicated or b) Require some handwaving ?

There are multiple scoring systems (American, Chinese, and Japanese and a couple of others).

* In Chinese scoring, stones do NOT penalize your score. So they capture your stone and gain +1 point, and lose 0 points.

* In American scoring, passing penalizes your score. So you place a stone (ultimately -1 point), they place 4 stones (-4 points), but you pass a further 4 points (4x passes == -4 more points). This ends with -4 points to the opponent, but -5 points to you. Effectively +1 point differential.

* In Japanese scoring, the player will declare your stone dead. Because you continue to object the players play it out. Once it has been played out, time is rewound and the state of the stones will be declared what both players now agree (ie: I need 4 stones to kill your stone, if you keep passing I'll kill it).

---------

So your question is only relevant to Japanese scoring (in the other two systems, you fail to gain any points). And in Japanese scoring, there is the "time rewind" rule for post-game debate. (You play out positions only to determine alive vs dead if there's a debate. This is rarely invoked because nearly everyone can instinctively see alive vs dead).

IE: In Japanese scoring, the game has ended after both players have passed. Time "rewinds" to this point, any "play" is purely for the determination of alive vs dead groups.

In all three cases, playing out such a position is considered a dick move and a waste of everyone's time.